Doctor’s Organization Has Treated Over 150,000 COVID-19 Patients With 99.99 Percent Survival

If there’s a silver lining to the pandemic, it’s that medical professionals observed firsthand the problems that ensued and realized that older adults
needed special consideration. (Monkey Business Images/Shutterstock)Doctor’s Organization Has Treated Over 150,000 COVID-19 Patients With 99.99 Percent Survival

‘Early Treatment Works, Period’
By Meiling Lee
January 26, 2022 Updated: January 26, 2022

A doctor who has been offering free telehealth services to COVID-19 patients during the pandemic says that early treatment for COVID-19 works, claiming that he has a 99.99 percent survival rate.

“We have a team of volunteer free doctors that donate their time to help treat these patients that come to us,” Dr. Ben Marble, the founder of myfreedoctor.com, an online medical consultation service, said at a roundtable discussion hosted by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) on Jan. 24.

He added, “We deliver the early treatment protocols to them as early as we can, and we have a 99.99 percent survival rate. So, I believe myfreedoctor.com, the free volunteered doctors have settled the science on this—early treatment works, period!”

Marble was answering Johnson’s question about what people can do if they or their loved ones have COVID-19.

People can visit the website myfreedoctor.com, create an account, and fill out a patient intake form if the doctors are accepting new patients for that day. One of the doctors will then reach out in less than 24 hours. With a huge demand for their services, the physicians say they can only “accept a certain number of patients each day.”

Marble says that he and his small team of volunteer doctors prescribe [Dr. Peter] McCullough’s treatment protocol, which consists of hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, monoclonal antibodies, prednisone, and other low-cost generic drugs. They also prescribe vitamins D and C, and zinc.

Epoch Times Photo
Vitamin C bottles were on display in Miami, Florida on June 15, 2001. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

McCullough, a cardiologist, and epidemiologist, along with several physicians put together an early treatment protocol to provide outpatient care for COVID-19 patients. Their paper was published in The American Journal of Medicine in August 2020.

Dr. Pierre Kory, a pulmonologist and the President at the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance, says that the public is not aware that there are doctors across the country who will provide telehealth and early treatment for COVID-19.

“On our website, we have a button, which says find a provider. We’ve tried to collect as many telehealth providers that treat all states in the country,” Kory said.

“We are trying to let that message be known because that message is being suppressed that this disease is treatable,” he added.

Kory also claims that there is corruption at the federal level in suppressing early treatment with repurposed cheap drugs and their availability and that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been “captured by the pharmaceutical industry.”

“The corruption is because they don’t want you to use off-label, repurposed generic medicines. It does not provide profit to the system,” Kory said, adding that, “you know what’s going on in this country right now, is that the CDC has been captured by the pharmaceutical industry.”

“They sent out a memo in August of 2021, they sent out a similar memo back in the spring 2020, telling the nation’s physicians and pharmacists not to use generic medicines.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to the CDC for comment.

Early treatments were and continue to be discouraged by the CDC, whose guidance since the beginning of the pandemic up until January 2022, only focused on people self-quarantining for 14 days, keeping hydrated, taking analgesics, and only seeking hospital care when they can’t breathe or turn blue. They also warned people to not take any medications not approved for COVID-19.

“People have been seriously harmed and even died after taking products not approved for use to treat or prevent COVID-19, even products approved or prescribed for other uses,” the CDC wrote on its potential treatments webpage.

The weblink provided for the alleged harmful product was related to a March 2020 health alert warning of a serious health effect from ingesting non-pharmaceutical chloroquine phosphate used to clean fish tanks. This alert came after an Arizona man and his wife took the non-pharmaceutical drug in an attempt to self-medicate for COVID-19.

For the past two years, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has only authorized limited early outpatient treatments for COVID-19 that include monoclonal antibodies for high-risk patients and antiviral pills from Merck and Pfizer. However, the FDA on Jan. 24 announced it was limiting the use of Eli Lilly and Regeneron monoclonal antibodies only to patients “likely to have been infected with or exposed to a variant that is susceptible to these treatments.”

Johnson held the roundtable discussion to offer a different perspective on the response to the pandemic, including on “the current state of knowledge of early and hospital treatment, vaccine efficacy and safety, what went right, what went wrong, what should be done now, and what needs to be addressed long term.”

The discussion panel consisted of renowned health experts and scientists that included McCullough, Dr. Robert Malone, and Dr. Paul Marik.

According to a press release, Johnson also invited over a dozen prominent figures involved in developing, promoting, and leading the pandemic response, including the CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky and White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Jeffrey Zients. All of the individuals declined to attend the forum.

Meiling Lee


Dr. Ryan Cole confirms the vaccine doesn’t work.

From the elites

ARE YOU AWAKE YET!!! 

Doctors Testify how they are being blackmailed; Wisconsin on route to decertify the 2020 election: The World is waking up

 

Doctor testifies that the health authorities have been blackmailing doctors to provoke their medical licenses if they issue exemptions.  The full video can be viewed at  https://rumble.com/vt62y6-covid-19-a-second-opinion.html  Discussion begins around 40 minute mark. Sen. Ron Johnson moderates a panel discussion, COVID-19: A Second Opinion. A group of world renowned doctors and medical experts provide a different perspective on the global pandemic response, the current state of knowledge of early and hospital treatment, vaccine efficacy and safety, what went right, what went wrong, what should be done now, and what needs to be addressed long term. Comments provide more insight.  More at www.ronjohnson.senate.gov. 

**HUGE BREAKING NEWS** — Wisconsin Assembly Votes to Advance Rep. Ramthun’s Resolution to Reclaim Wisconsin’s Electors For President and Vice President That Were Certified Under Fraudulent Purposes — VIDEO

Nuremberg 2.0 Unfolding; The People are the Storm, Do Not Comply

In the USA, Attorneys are asking Senator Ron Jonhson for investigation of the corrupt CDC,  Secretary of the Department of Defense and others.


In Germany,  Lawyer Reiner Fuellmich explains how he sees the indictments unfolding from the Nuremberg 2.0 trial throughout the world.

America’s Frontline Doctors attorney files lawsuit against U.S. government for 45,000 covid vaccine deaths

In Australia 


 

SITUATION UPDATE 1/22/22

‘Defeat the Mandates’: Thousands Protest in Washington Against Vaccine Requirements; How to Detox from the Jab

Crowd gathers at Lincoln Memorial for the "Defeat the Mandates" rally in Washington on Jan. 23, 2022. (Lynn Lin/NTD)
Crowd gathers at Lincoln Memorial for the “Defeat the Mandates” rally in Washington on Jan. 23, 2022.

‘Defeat the Mandates’: Thousands Protest in Washington Against Vaccine Requirements

By Jack Phillips
January 23, 2022 Updated: January 23, 2022

Thousands of people turned out in Washington to march in protest against COVID-19 vaccine mandates on Jan. 23—one of the largest U.S. events and protests held against the mandates since the start of the pandemic.

Starting at 12:30 p.m. local time, thousands of people marched around the Washington Monument to the Lincoln Memorial, with many holding signs decrying COVID-19 regulations, vaccine passports, and mandates. Some criticized the Biden administration’s vaccine mandates.

 

In recent weeks, U.S. COVID-19 cases have skyrocketed in areas that have high vaccination rates, once again casting a shadow on the effectiveness of the shots, and a recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study suggested that natural immunity is superior to vaccines against the Delta variant. Federal officials frequently say that vaccines protect against severe disease and hospitalization.

Former NBA star Kwame Brown, who has frequently criticized vaccine mandates on social media, told The Epoch Times that he attended because “I think we got to get back to compassion for our fellow man and woman.”

“People are being put out of work” over mandates, he said on Jan. 23 in Washington. “People are not being able to go over to their friends and family’s house. … I think everybody should have a right to choose whether they want to do it … and that’s what America is supposed to be about.”

Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, who was fired three weeks ago by the University of California–Irvine for challenging the school’s mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policy, similarly told The Epoch Times on Jan. 23: “Americans need to recover our right to assembly and our right to public spaces.

“I think the most important thing about this event is that it is a public event. And it’s an opportunity for all of us to be together in solidarity and love for one another, to speak up against coercive mandates, to let doctors be doctors without other entities coming between a doctor’s own medical judgment and caring for his patient.”

Kheriaty, who has become a frequent critic of vaccine passports and mandates, said he hopes this event “will catalyze a movement in the United States.” And while some media outlets have described the march as an “anti-vaccine” event, Kheriaty and march organizers said it’s the mandates, not the vaccines, that they oppose.

One of the march’s organizers told Fox News over the weekend that the rally is important to push back against what he described as increasingly coercive measures that are coming from the White House.

“You’re going to hear a lot of [talk on the left that] this is a big, anti-vax rally, [that] it’s people coming in to deny science,” march organizer Will Witt stated. “But this march is about the mandate, and this march is about the Draconian measures that we’re seeing all across this country right now, especially in places like D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco.”

Jan Jekielek contributed to this report.

Jack Phillips

BREAKING NEWS REPORTER
Jack Phillips is a breaking news reporter at The Epoch Times based in New York.

HOW TO DETOX FROM THE VACCINE

Insurance Companies Note 40 Percent Rise in Deaths, is it Related to the Jabs?

 

Insurance Companies Note 40 Percent Rise in Deaths

Some experts worry that an unprecedented rise in death rates of younger people is linked to the vaccine
By Conan Milner January 24, 2022 Updated: January 24, 2022

Insurance companies are reporting a jump in death payouts due to a dramatic rise in the number of deaths. The rise in the death rate is being corroborated by death certificate data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The death rate is up by 40 percent from pre-pandemic levels according to Scott Davison, chief executive of OneAmerica, a major insurance company based in Indianapolis. During an online news conference on Dec. 30, 2021, Davison said the change was unprecedented.

“We are seeing, right now, the highest death rates we have seen in the history of this business,” he said.

OneAmerica sells life insurance to employers nationwide, and similar figures are found throughout the industry.

“The data is consistent across every player in that business,” Davison said. “And what we saw just in the third quarter—we’re seeing it continue into the fourth quarter—is that death rates are up 40 percent over what they were pre-pandemic. Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three-sigma or a one-in-200-year catastrophe would be a 10 percent increase over pre-pandemic. So 40 percent is just unheard of.”

This 40 percent figure doesn’t represent folks dying of old age, but is instead a reflection of deaths in working-age adults, aged 18 to 65. However, what’s responsible for the alarming spike in fatalities in this age group isn’t clear.

With all of the concern about COVID-19 lately, the contagion seems a likely choice. But according to Davison, something else is at play. He said the data coming from insurance companies—entities in the business of paying out when people die—show that the deaths being reported as COVID-19 fatalities “greatly understate” the actual deaths from working age people hit by the pandemic, as most of the claims being filed aren’t being classified as COVID-19 deaths.

“It may not all be COVID on their death certificate, but deaths are up just huge, huge numbers,” he said.

Also taking part in the news conference was Brian Tabor, president of the Indiana Hospital Association. He also noted a dramatic rise in illness from a different perspective. Tabor said hospitals across Indiana were being flooded with patients “with many different conditions.”

In October 2021, The Times of India reported that health insurers saw a “huge surge in non-COVID claims,” with the head of interventional cardiology at a Mumbai, India, hospital noting a 40 percent increase in heart problems compared to the previous six to eight months.

Ever since COVID-19 hit, the world has been bracing itself for huge numbers. Most recently in a White House press briefing on Dec. 17, 2021, President Joe Biden warned that unvaccinated Americans can look forward to a “winter of severe illness and death for yourselves, your families, and the hospitals you may soon overwhelm.”

Still, such astronomical figures emerging all of a sudden are hard to fathom. The pandemic has worn on for nearly two years, and health officials have been keeping a close eye on the death count. What could account for such a dramatic jump at the end of 2021?

Some suggest that opioid overdoses are to blame, particularly fentanyl. According to an analysis of data from the CDC, fentanyl fatalities have skyrocketed during the pandemic. From April 2020 to April 2021, more than 64,000 overdose deaths were attributed to fentanyl poisoning—nearly double the same period in 2019. The drug has become the number one cause of death for Americans between the ages of 18 and 45.

But there’s more to the story than fentanyl. Although the rise in opioid overdoses accounts for some of the increased deaths in the United States, there’s no comparable opioid crisis in another country reporting a dramatic rise in their non-COVID-19 death rate.

It’s tempting to dismiss this figure altogether, as many statistics that have emerged over the pandemic’s tenure initially caused alarm, only to remain in the realm of misinformation, speculation, and misinterpretation. We’ve heard breathless reports of mathematical models projecting an enormous surge of COVID-19 deaths that never came close to measuring up to actual data.

We now live in a world where we’re not sure if cases are actually rising or if there’s just an increase in testing; where we’re not sure if death statistics reflect people who have died from COVID-19 or simply died with COVID-19. As a result, we’ve become conditioned to take many headline-grabbing statistics with a grain of salt.

But this insurance company figure is making experts take more notice.

Dr. Robert Malone, an internationally recognized scientist and physician who’s credited with inventing the technology that drives the mRNA vaccines now being used to inoculate against COVID-19, published an article examining the implications behind this alarming 40 percent rise in deaths.

Malone notes that several conspiracy theories have clouded our understanding throughout the pandemic, but he came to an uncomfortable conclusion that this insurance figure may have significantly more weight to it.

“I could hardly believe what I was reading,” Malone wrote. “This headline is a nuclear truth bomb masquerading as an insurance agent’s dry manila envelope full of actuarial tables.”

So if the dramatic rise in deaths among working age adults isn’t being caused by COVID-19 and drug overdoses, then what is the cause? Malone has suggested the unthinkable: The culprit may be the vaccines designed to guard against COVID-19. This heavily promoted vaccine has been repeatedly promised to be safe and effective. Many adults have now taken three doses, with a recommended fourth booster dose predicted for this fall. The shot has also been authorized for children as young as 5 years old.

“If this holds true, then the genetic vaccines so aggressively promoted have failed,” Malone wrote. “At worst, this report implies that the federal workplace vaccine mandates have driven what [appears] to be a true crime against humanity. Massive loss of life in (presumably) workers that have been forced to accept a toxic vaccine at higher frequency relative to the general population of Indiana.”

Before the insurance report, Malone was already an outspoken critic of the mRNA vaccines used to inoculate against COVID-19 and was recently booted off of social media platforms for voicing these views. But there are other signs that the vaccines many consider to be a savior may in fact be causing harm.

According to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), more than 1 million adverse events are associated with the COVID-19 vaccines, including more than 20,000 deaths. With other vaccines, the CDC typically consults VAERS numbers to monitor problems. But with the COVID-19 vaccines, health officials have generally been unconcerned with what this self reporting system suggests.

In a Senate Health Committee hearing on Jan. 11, Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) asked if thousands of Americans really did die of the COVID-19 vaccines, as VAERS reports.

According to Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the CDC, VAERS numbers aren’t an accurate reflection of vaccine deaths.

“If you get hit by a car tragically after being vaccinated, that gets reported in the VAERS system,” Walensky said. “The vaccines are incredibly safe. They protect us against Omicron, they protect us against Delta, they protect us against COVID. They don’t protect us against every other form of mortality out there.”

When Tuberville asked Dr. Anthony Fauci for more clarity regarding the true fatalities linked to the vaccine, Fauci lamented the same flaw inherent in the VAERS system.

“If you get vaccinated and you walk out and get hit by a car, that is considered a death,” Fauci said. “That’s where it gets confusing. Everything that happens after the vaccination, even if you die of something completely obviously unrelated, it’s considered a death. So if I had metastatic cancer, got vaccinated, and died two weeks later that gets counted.”

Walensky noted that every one of the VAERS reports gets adjudicated.

However, there’s a pattern of a rise in deaths followed by the COVID-19 vaccines. One recent study reveals an increase in deaths in 145 countries following the rollout of the new vaccinations.

Quarterly reports from other insurance companies used in one recent analysis by American Thinker also show a rise in deaths during the same time period. Prudential showed an 87 percent increase in death benefits paid for the third quarter of 2021 compared to the same time period in 2020. Pacific Life and Annuity showed claims being up by more than 80 percent.

This American Thinker analysis drew a similar conclusion to Malone.

“It is possible that these deaths represent neglected care, the postponed treatments of heart disease, cancer, and the like. But that seems unlikely, given the spike in the third-quarter deaths. And presumably COVID already took the most vulnerable in 2020 in the absence of a vaccine. These massive claims seemed to be a phenomenon of the third quarter—about six months after the vaccine regimen became widely available,” the analysis reads.

Data analyst Jessica Rose adds more perspective. Rose, who holds a doctorate in computational biology with two post doctoral degrees in molecular biology and biochemistry, said the indications from the Indiana insurance company are simply that: indications. However, Rose noted that if the data we’re seeing in VAERS and other adverse event reporting systems hold true, the problem could in fact be much worse.

“And if what is being reported with regards to immune deficiencies associated with these injections is not simply anecdotal or representative of a small sub-cohort of individuals, we could be looking at a government imposed complete health disaster,” Rose wrote.

Straight from the Insurance Companies

 

Crimes against Humanity; ‘Red’ States With Deadly Batches of Vaccine; The Covid test is fake and the 2020 election

There is evidence  that the  US Government targeted ‘Red’ States With Deadly Batches of Vaccine

UK Pharmacist gives evidence to the Police about the catastrophic effects people who take the vaccine are having and the suppression of information.

Dr. Andrew Kaufman on the pointless exercise of testing.  Stop taking the fake test, because it just  keeps the corrupt media narrative alive.

MIKE LINDELL BREAKS DOWN THE AZ AUDIT

New Emails Reveal Fauci’s Role, the mask is off

New Emails Reveal Fauci’s Role in Shaping Highly Influential Paper That Established COVID ‘Natural Origin’ Narrative

January 20, 2022 Updated: January 20, 2022

News Analysis

New evidence has emerged that suggests that Dr. Anthony Fauci not only initiated efforts to cover up evidence pointing to a lab origin of SARS-CoV-2 but actively shaped a highly influential academic paper that excluded the possibility of a lab leak.

Fauci’s involvement with the paper wasn’t acknowledged by the authors, as it should have been under prevailing academic standards. Neither was it acknowledged by Fauci himself, who denied having communicated with the authors when asked directly while testifying before Congress last week.

The article, Proximal Origin, was co-authored by five virologists, four of whom participated in a Feb. 1, 2020, teleconference that was hastily convened by Fauci, who serves as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), and Jeremy Farrar, who heads the UK-based Wellcome Trust, after public reporting of a potential link between the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China and the COVID-19 outbreak.

The initial draft of Proximal Origin was completed on the same day the teleconference, which wasn’t made public, took place. Notably, at least three authors of the paper were privately telling Fauci’s teleconference group both during the call and in subsequent emails that they were 60 to 80 percent sure that COVID-19 had come out of a lab.

Until now, it wasn’t known what role, if any, Fauci played in shaping the contents of the article, which formed the primary basis for government officials and media organizations to claim the “natural origin” theory for the virus. While the contents of emails previously released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) show the Proximal Origin paper clearly conflicts with the authors’ private views on the virus’ origin, it was unclear if the authors had preemptively reshaped their views to please Fauci or if Fauci himself had an active role in shaping the article.

As the head of NIAID, Fauci controls a large portion of the world’s research funds for virologists. At least three virologists involved in the drafting of Proximal Origin have seen substantial increases in funding from the agency since the paper was first published. Any interference by Fauci in the paper’s narrative would present a serious conflict of interest.

Emails Show That Fauci, Collins Exerted Influence

Newly released notes taken by House Republican staffers from emails that still remain largely redacted clearly point to Fauci having been actively engaged in shaping the article and its conclusion. The GOP lawmakers gained limited access to the emails after a months-long battle with Fauci’s parent body, the Department of Health and Human Services.

The new emails reveal that on Feb. 4, 2020, one of the article’s co-authors, virologist Edward Holmes, shared a draft of Proximal Origin with Farrar. Like Fauci, Farrar controls the disbursement of vast amounts of funding for virology research.

Holmes prefaced his email to Farrar with the note that the authors “did not mention other anomalies as this will make us look like loons.” It isn’t known what other anomalies Holmes was referring to, but his statement indicates that Proximal Origin may have omitted certain anomalies of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, suggesting that the paper may have been narrative-driven from the start.

Epoch Times Photo
Dr. Anthony Fauci (R), director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, speaks while U.S. President Donald Trump (C) and Vice President Mike Pence listen during a briefing on the coronavirus pandemic, in the press briefing room of the White House on March 24, 2020. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

During Fauci’s teleconference, participants had discussed at least two anomalies specific to the virus—the virus’s furin cleavage site, which has never been observed in naturally occurring SARS coronaviruses, and the pathogen’s unusual backbone, which fails to match any known virus backbone.

Farrar almost immediately shared Holmes’s draft with Fauci and Collins via email, while excluding other participants of the teleconference. The ensuing email thread containing discussion among the three suggests that the reason for the secretiveness may have been that they were shaping the content of the paper itself, something that has never been publicly acknowledged.

It’s notable that the email thread included only the three senior members of the teleconference. Using Farrar as a conduit to communicate with the authors may have been seen by Fauci and Collins as adding a layer of deniability.

Fauci, Collins Express Concern Over ‘Serial Passage’

During a Feb. 4, 2020, email exchange among the men, Collins pointed out that Proximal Origin argued against an engineered virus but that serial passage was “still an option” in the draft. Fauci appeared to share Collins’s concerns, noting in a one-line response: “?? Serial passage in ACE2-transgenic mice.”

Serial passage is a process whereby a virus is manipulated in a lab by repeatedly passing it through human-like tissue such as genetically modified mice, which mimic human lung tissue. This is notable given that during the Feb. 1 teleconference, at least three of Proximal Origin’s authors had advised Collins and Fauci that the virus may have been manipulated in a lab through serial passage or by genetic insertion of certain features.

Epoch Times Photo
Then-National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Francis Collins stands in Bethesda, Md., on Jan. 26, 2021. Collins stepped down in December 2021. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

One day after Fauci and Collins shared their comments, on Feb. 5, 2020, Farrar emailed Fauci and Collins stating that “[t]he team will update the draft today and I will forward immediately—they will add further comments on the glycans.”

The reference to glycans is notable as they are carbohydrate-based polymers produced by humans. The push by Fauci, Collins, and Farrar to have the paper’s authors expand on the issue of glycans appears to confirm that they were exerting direct influence on the content of Proximal Origin.

According to Rossana Segreto, a microbiologist and member of the virus origins search group DRASTIC, emphasizing the presence of glycans in SARS-CoV-2 might suggest that Fauci and his group were looking to add arguments against serial passage in the lab. A study later found that Proximal Origin’s prediction on the presence of the O-linked glycans wasn’t valid.

The newly released emails don’t reveal what additional discussions may have taken place among Fauci, Collins, and Farrar in the ensuing days. Perhaps that’s partly because Farrar had noted on another email thread addressed to Fauci’s teleconference group that scientific discussions should be taken offline.

Online Version Appears to Incorporate Fauci, Collins Suggestions

Eleven days later, on Feb. 16, 2020, Proximal Origin was published online. The paper argued aggressively for a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2.

An immediate observation from an examination of the Feb. 16 version of Proximal Origin is that “glycans,” the term that Farrar, Fauci and Collins wanted to emphasize, is cited 12 times. We don’t know to what extent glycans were discussed in the Feb. 4 draft as it remains concealed by National Institute of Health (NIH) officials.

An item of particular significance is that the Feb. 16 version omits any mention of the ACE2-transgenic mice that Fauci had initially flagged in his Feb. 4 email to Collins and Farrar. While the Feb. 16 version of Proximal Origin acknowledges that a furin cleavage site could have been generated through serial passage using animals with ACE2 receptors, the cited animals in the Feb. 16 version were ferrets—not transgenic mice.

Epoch Times Photo
The P4 laboratory on the campus of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, on May 13, 2020. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)

The authors’ use of ferrets is peculiar not only because the term “transgenic mice” was almost certainly used in the Feb. 4 version but also because it was known at the time that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was conducting serial passage experiments on coronaviruses using ACE2 transgenic mice.

Even more conspicuously, the reference to ferrets was removed entirely from a March 17 updated version of the paper. In its place, a passage was added that stated “such work [serial passage experiments with ACE2 animals] has also not previously been described,” in academic literature—despite the fact that the Wuhan Institute’s work with ACE2 transgenic mice has been extensively described in academic papers.

Published Version of Proximal Origin Was Altered

Following the online publication of Proximal Origin on Feb. 16, 2020, the article was published in the prominent science journal Nature on March 17. In addition to the changes surrounding the transgenic mice, a number of other notable edits were made to strengthen the natural origin narrative.

On March 6, 2020, the paper’s lead author, Kristian Andersen, appeared to acknowledge the inputs from Collins, Farrar, and Fauci, when he emailed the three to say, “Thank you again for your advice and leadership as we have been working through the SARS-CoV-2 ‘origins’ paper.”

Perhaps most strikingly, the most often publicly cited passage from the March 17 version of the paper, “we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible,” doesn’t appear in the Feb. 16 version. Additionally, while the Feb. 16 version states that “genomic evidence does not support the idea that SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory construct” the March 17 version was altered to state that “the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus.”

Similar changes in language are evident in various parts of the March 17 version. For example, a section that stated “analysis provides evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct” was amended to read “analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct.”

Epoch Times Photo
A medical staff member gestures inside an isolation ward at Red Cross Hospital in Wuhan in China’s Hubei Province on March 10, 2020. (STR/AFP via Getty Images)

The March 17 version also omits an entire section from the Feb. 16 version that centered around an amino acid called phenylalanine. According to Segreto, a similarly situated amino acid in the original SARS virus had “mutated into phenylalanine as result of cell passage in human airway epithelium.” Segreto surmises that the Proximal Origin authors might have deleted this section so as not to highlight that the phenylalanine in SARS-CoV-2 might have resulted from serial passage in a lab.

Segreto’s analysis is backed up by the fact that another section in the Feb. 16 version which states that “experiments with [the original] SARS-CoV have shown that engineering such a site at the S1/S2 junction enhances cell–cell fusion,” was reworded in the March 17 version to leave out the word “engineering.” Indeed, while the Feb. 16 version merely downplayed the possibility of the virus having been engineered in a lab, in the March 17 version, the word “engineered” was expunged from the paper altogether.

Another sentence omitted from the March 17 version noted that “[i]nterestingly, 200 residents of Wuhan did not show coronavirus seroreactivity.” Had the sentence remained, it would have suggested that, unlike other regions in China, no SARS-related viruses were circulating in Wuhan in the years leading up to the pandemic. That makes natural spillover less likely. The director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Shi Zhengli, herself admitted that she never expected a SARS-related virus to emerge in Wuhan. When viruses emerged naturally in the past, they emerged in southern China.

Shi’s credibility already was coming under fire for failing to disclose that she had the closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2 in her possession for seven years—a point noted early on by Segreto. Additionally, the Wuhan Institute took its entire database of viral sequences offline on Sept. 12, 2019. Despite the Wuhan Institute’s documented deletion and concealment of data, Proximal Origin’s central argument is that SARS-CoV-2 had to be natural since its backbone didn’t match any known backbones.

However, even before the March 17 version was published, Segreto had stated publicly that Proximal Origin’s central backbone argument was inherently flawed, precisely because there was no way of knowing whether the Chinese lab had published the relevant viral sequences.

Fauci, Collins, Farrar Roles Improperly Concealed

The email exchange among Fauci, Farrar, and Collins presents clear evidence that the three men took an active role in shaping the narrative of Proximal Origin. Indeed, a careful comparison of the Feb. 16 and March 17 versions show that the changes made fail to reflect any fundamental change in scientific analysis.

Instead, the authors employed linguistic changes and wholesale deletions that appear to have been designed to reinforce the natural origin narrative.

Close scrutiny of the email discussions by the three scientists also suggests that there was no legal justification for redacting any of the newly released information in the first place.

Epoch Times Photo
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, talks to members of the press prior to an event at the State Dining Room of the White House on Jan. 21, 2021. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Science journals require that contributions to scientific papers need to be acknowledged. According to Nature’s publishing guidelines, “[c]ontributors who do not meet all criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgements section.” The newly revealed sections of the still-redacted emails appear to confirm that Fauci, Farrar, and Collins met the criteria for acknowledgement but their names have never appeared on any published version of Proximal Origin, suggesting that the three didn’t want their involvement in the paper’s creation to be known.

Collins Asked Fauci ‘to Help Put Down’ Fox News Story

A final email released by the House Republicans shows that Collins wrote Fauci several months later on April 16, 2020, telling him that he had hoped that Proximal Origin would have “settled” the origin debate, but it apparently hadn’t since Bret Baier of Fox News was reporting that sources were confident the virus had come out of a lab.

Collins asked Fauci whether the NIH could do something “to help put down this very destructive conspiracy” that seemed to be “growing momentum.” Collins also suggested that he and Fauci ask the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) to weigh in. As was revealed in previous emails released under FOIA, Fauci’s group had pushed NASEM in early Feb. 2020 to promote the natural origin narrative.

Fauci told Collins that the lab leak theory was a “shiny object” that would go away in time. However, the next day, Fauci took responsive action when he categorically dismissed the possibility of a lab origin of COVID-19 during on April 17, 2020, White House press conference. In doing so, Fauci cited the Proximal Origin paper as corroboration of his claims. Notably, Fauci feigned independence, telling reporters that he couldn’t recall the names of the authors. Unbeknownst to reporters and the public at the time, four out of the five authors had participated in Fauci’s Feb. 1, 2020, teleconference.

Now, we know that Fauci had involvement in shaping the very article that he cited.

Fauci’s intervention at the April 17 White House briefing was effective, since media interest in the lab leak theory quickly waned. It didn’t resurface until May 2021, when former New York Times science writer Nicholas Wade published an article discussing the likelihood of a lab leak. Wade noted that “[a] virologist keen to continue his career would be very attentive to Fauci’s and Farrar’s wishes.”

Notably, Segreto had raised a similar concern after Proximal Origin was first published in February 2020, asking whether certain virologists were scared that if the truth came out, their research activities would be curtailed.

Jeff Carlson

Jeff Carlson co-hosts the show Truth Over News on Epoch TV. He is a CFA-registered Charterholder and worked for 20 years as an analyst and portfolio manager in the high-yield bond market. He also runs the website TheMarketsWork.com and can be followed on Twitter @themarketswork.
Hans Mahncke

Hans Mahncke co-hosts the show Truth Over News on Epoch TV. He holds LL.B., LL.M. and Ph.D. degrees in law. He is the author of numerous law books and his research has been published in a range of international journals. Hans can be followed on Twitter @hansmahncke.


This not a vaccine 

Panel of MD’s talk about the ingredients in the vaccines; EU MEP’s speak against the tyranny; ‘Waste of Time’ to Keep Vaccinating People

Panel of MD’s talk about the ingredients in the vaccines and what effect they have on the body.

EU MEP’s speak and rally against the Covid passport tyranny

‘Waste of Time’ to Keep Vaccinating People: Ex-Head of UK Vaccine Taskforce

January 16, 2022 Updated: January 16, 2022Felix Dima, 13, from Newcastle receives the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine at the Excelsior Academy in Newcastle upon Tyne, England, on Sept. 22, 2021. (Ian Forsyth/Getty Images)

Felix Dima, 13, from Newcastle receives the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine at the Excelsior Academy in Newcastle upon Tyne, England, on Sept. 22, 2021. (Ian Forsyth/Getty Images)

‘Waste of Time’ to Keep Vaccinating People: Ex-Head of UK Vaccine Taskforce

January 16, 2022 Updated: January 16, 2022

It is a “waste of time” to keep vaccinating people against the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, the former chairman of Britain’s Vaccines Taskforce has said.

Dr. Clive Dix, who played a key role in helping pharmaceutical firms create the COVID-19 vaccines, told LBC radio on Jan. 16: “The Omicron variant is a relatively mild virus. And to just keep vaccinating people and thinking of doing it again to protect the population is, in my view, now a waste of time.”

Dix said the focus now should be on protecting vulnerable people, such as those over 60, 2 percent of whom remain unvaccinated.

“We should have a highly-focused approach to get those people vaccinated and anybody else who’s vulnerable,” he said.

Though he supports the ongoing booster campaign, he said he has been “critical” of boosting everybody as he is not convinced “it was needed or is needed” for younger people.

Dix said, “I think the thinking of the time was very much to stop infection and transmission where clearly these vaccines don’t do that.”

He said the government needs to be “very focused” on educating itself for the “future vaccination programme” next winter.

He suggested that an “immune status study” should be conducted to “understand exactly where everybody’s immunity is,” so that “by next winter, we can really have a policy of vaccination that’s educated, using the right vaccines at the right time for the right people.”

Dix told The Observer newspaper last week that mass vaccination against COVID-19 should come to an end and the UK should focus on managing it as an endemic disease like flu.

“We now need to manage disease, not virus spread,” he said. “So stopping progression to severe disease in vulnerable groups is the future objective.”

The UK government’s medical advisers have already acknowledged that it is “untenable” to jab the population every three or six months.

Sir Patrick Vallance, the UK’s chief scientific adviser, said on Jan. 3 that it is not the government’s “long-term view” to give everyone a booster vaccine every few months.

Professor Andrew Pollard, director of the Oxford Vaccine Group and chair of the government’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), told The Telegraph that it’s “not sustainable or affordable” to “vaccinate the planet every four to six months.”

On Jan. 7, the UK government’s vaccination advisory committee recommended against giving a fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccine to nursing home residents and people over 80.

The JCVI said the three doses of the vaccines are still providing “very good protection against severe disease,” and an immediate second booster dose to the most vulnerable would “provide only limited additional benefit against severe disease at this time.”

Lily Zhou and PA Media contributed to this report.

BREAKING NEWS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL COMMON LAW COURT OF JUSTICE, JANUARY 15, 2022 (GMT) BIG PHARMA, GOVERNMENT, CHURCH LEADERS FACE ARREST AS COURT CONVICTS THEM OF GENOCIDE, PROHIBITS INJECTIONS

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Alternative Treatment and Prevention

A video shows FAUCI and other HHS officials discussing in October 2019, how a new virus from China could be used to enforce vaccination everywhere.

As many of us have long suspected, this was never about fighting a new virus. Footage from a panel discussion at the Milken Institute has been revealed. It’s about finding a new way to introduce a universal flu vaccine.

Dr. Rick Bright suggested that a novel bird flu virus could break out of China, which could then be used to create a global mRNA vaccine that could be tested on the public.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Alternative Treatment and Prevention

Positive Covid Rapid test from tap water

Words of wisdom

 

Dr. Robert Malone | 19 Narrative-Changing Highlights from His 3-Hour Interview w/ Joe Rogan

Dr. Robert Malone | 19 Narrative-Changing Highlights from His 3-Hour Interview w/ Joe Rogan

 

%d bloggers like this: